Professional Documents
Culture Documents
These Guidance Notes provide suggested global performance analysis methodologies, modeling strategies
and numerical simulation approaches for floating offshore wind turbines. These Guidance Notes do not set
additional design requirements and criteria other than those specified in the FOWT Guide, and should be
used as a supporting document to the FOWT Guide.
The July 2020 edition aligns these Guidance Notes with the latest edition of the FOWT Guide.
These Guidance Notes become effective on the first day of the month of publication.
Users are advised to check periodically on the ABS website www.eagle.org to verify that this version of
these Guidance Notes is the most current.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND ii
TURBINES • 2020
GUIDANCE NOTES ON
GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING
OFFSHORE WIND TURBINES
CONTENTS
SECTION 1 Introduction.......................................................................................... 7
1 General........................................................................................... 7
3 Applications.................................................................................... 7
5 Terms and Definitions..................................................................... 7
5.1 Terminology....................................................................... 7
5.3 Abbreviations................................................................... 12
7 References................................................................................... 13
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND iii
TURBINES • 2020
SECTION 3 Modeling of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines................................ 20
1 General......................................................................................... 20
3 Modeling of the Hull...................................................................... 20
3.1 Hydrostatic Loads............................................................ 20
3.3 Wave Loads on the Large-Volume Floating Hull..............21
3.5 Wind Loads, Current Loads and Hull VIM....................... 22
3.7 Instability..........................................................................22
5 Modeling of Flexibility of Tower.....................................................22
7 Modeling of Stationkeeping System............................................. 23
7.1 General............................................................................ 23
7.3 Mooring Line Nonlinearity................................................ 23
7.5 Finite Element Analysis Approach................................... 23
9 Modeling of Dynamics of Drive Trains.......................................... 24
11 Modeling of Rotor Blade and Control and Safety Systems...........24
11.1 General............................................................................ 24
11.3 Gravitational and Inertia Loads........................................25
11.5 Aerodynamic Loads......................................................... 25
11.7 Actuation Loads (Operational Loads).............................. 26
13 Modeling of Wind Farm Wake Effects...........................................26
15 Power Cable Considerations........................................................ 26
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND iv
TURBINES • 2020
1 Frequency-Domain and Time-Domain Analysis........................... 32
1.1 Frequency-Domain Analysis............................................32
1.3 Time-Domain Analysis..................................................... 32
1.5 Combined Time-Domain and Frequency-Domain
Analysis........................................................................... 33
3 Quasi-Static and Dynamic Analysis..............................................33
3.1 Quasi-Static Analysis.......................................................33
3.3 Dynamic Analysis............................................................ 33
5 Coupled, Semi-Coupled, and Uncoupled Analysis....................... 34
5.1 Coupled Analysis............................................................. 34
5.3 Semi-Coupled Analysis....................................................34
5.5 Uncoupled Analysis......................................................... 34
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND v
TURBINES • 2020
3.3 Frequency-Domain Analyses for Single Point
Mooring Systems............................................................. 42
3.5 Time-Domain Analyses....................................................42
3.7 Combined Time-Domain and Frequency-Domain
Analyses.......................................................................... 42
3.9 Maximum and Minimum Tendon Tensions.......................43
5 Suggested Time-Domain Analysis Procedure.............................. 43
7 Design Checks..............................................................................44
9 Line Length and Geometry Constraints........................................ 44
11 Anchor Forces.............................................................................. 44
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND vi
TURBINES • 2020
SECTION 1 Introduction
Because significant interactions could occur among the Rotor-Nacelle Assembly (RNA) and control
system, the tower, the floating substructure and the stationkeeping system, an integrated (‘coupled’) model
including all these components is recommended to be used for global performance analyses. An alternative
method, where the dynamic analyses of the stationkeeping system are performed separately by using the
responses of the floating substructure as boundary conditions, may also be acceptable, provided that the
coupling effect of the stationkeeping system and the floating substructure is adequately taken into account.
The global performance analysis software should have the capability of considering complex interactions
among aerodynamic loads, hydrodynamic loads, actions of turbine safety and control systems and
structural dynamic responses of the FOWT. The analysis procedures should reflect the application limits of
the selected software. Both publically available, industry-recognized software and in-house software may
be used for the analyses. However, in-house software has to be adequately calibrated against model tests,
field tests or the industry-recognized software.
General guidance on global performance analyses of the floating substructure and the stationkeeping
systems can be found in:
● ABS Rules for Building and Classing Floating Production Installations (FPI Rules), API RP 2T, API
RP 2FPS and ISO 19904-1 for the design of floating offshore structures
● ABS Guide for Position Mooring Systems, API RP 2SK, API RP 2SM and ISO 19901-7 for catenary
mooring and taut leg mooring systems. API RP 2T for TLP tendon systems. References are also made
to other appropriate ABS Rules, Guides and Guidance Notes such as those listed in 1/7.
5.1 Terminology
5.1.1 Added Mass
Effective addition to system mass, which is proportional to the mass of displaced water.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 7
TURBINES • 2020
Section 1 Introduction 1
5.1.14 Gust
Brief rise and fall in wind speed lasting less than 1 minute.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 8
TURBINES • 2020
Section 1 Introduction 1
5.1.15 Hull
Combination of connected buoyant structural components such as columns, pontoons and
intermediate structural braces; see also Monohull (see 1/5.1.23).
5.1.17 Idling
Condition of a wind turbine that is rotating slowly and not producing power.
5.1.18 Load
External load applied to the structure (direct load) or an imposed deformation or acceleration
(indirect load).
5.1.20 Mean Sea Level or Mean Still Water Level (MSL) (1 July 2020)
Average level of the sea over a period long enough to remove variations due to waves, tides and
storm surges (see also 4-5/7 FIGURE 1 of the FOWT Guide).
5.1.23 Monohull
Floating structure consisting of a single, continuous, buoyant hull, and geometrically similar to an
ocean-going ship or barge.
5.1.28 Parked
Condition of a wind turbine that is either in the Standstill or Idling condition, depending on the
design of the wind turbine.
5.1.29 Pretension
Tension applied to a mooring line or tendon when the Floating Support Structure at its static
equilibrium position in mean still water and still air.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 9
TURBINES • 2020
Section 1 Introduction 1
i) The Rotor components, including blades, hub, shaft, and spinner; and
ii) The Nacelle, a housing which contains the mainframe, generator frame, drive train
components, electrical generator components, wind turbine control and protection
components and other elements on top of the tower.
5.1.34 Ringing
High frequency vertical vibration of the TLP spring-mass system excited by impulsive loading.
5.1.35 Semi-submersible
Floating structure normally consisting of a deck structure connected to submerged pontoons
through a number of widely spaced, large cross-section supporting columns.
5.1.36 Set-down
Increase in the draft of a floating structure (for example, TLP) with the increase in the offset due
to mooring or tendon system restraint.
5.1.38 Spar
Deep-draft, small water-plane area floating structure.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 10
TURBINES • 2020
Section 1 Introduction 1
5.1.41 Springing
High frequency vertical vibration of the TLP spring-mass system excited by cyclic loading at or
near the TLP pitch or heave resonant periods.
5.1.42 Standstill
Condition of a wind turbine that is not rotating.
5.1.45 Tendon
A system of components, which form a link between the Hull structure and the Foundation System
for the purpose of restraining motion of the TLP-type Floating Support Structure within specified
limits in response to environmental and other loading.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 11
TURBINES • 2020
Section 1 Introduction 1
5.1.58 Weathervaning
Process by which a floating support structure passively varies its heading in response to time-
varying environmental actions.
5.1.59 Yawing
Rotation of the rotor axis about a vertical axis for horizontal axis wind turbines.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 12
TURBINES • 2020
Section 1 Introduction 1
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 13
TURBINES • 2020
SECTION 2 Characteristics of Floating Offshore Wind
Turbines
Depending on specific site conditions, ocean waves typically contain first-order energy in the range 3 to
30s. For the floating substructure, the natural periods of different modes of motion are of primary interest
and, to a large extent, reflect the design philosophy. Typical motion natural periods of different types of
floating substructure are summarized in 2/3 TABLE 1.
TABLE 1
Representative Natural Periods of Typical FOWT Floating Substructure
(1 July 2020)
A TLP-type floating substructure consists of the structural components of the hull connecting to the tendon
system. It may also include a column top frame and topside deck. The hull consists of buoyant pontoons
and columns. The tops of the columns may be connected to the tower directly or to a column top frame or
a topside deck forming the global strength of the hull. The tendon system consists of a vertical mooring
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 14
TURBINES • 2020
Section 2 Characteristics of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines 2
system that forms the link between the hull and the foundation for the purpose of mooring the floating
support structure. The foundation system is used to anchor the tendons to the seafloor.
The TLP-type floating substructure differs fundamentally from the other floating structure concepts,
mostly because of the following reasons:
● Tendon stiffness, rather than the ‘water-plane’ stiffness, governs the vertical motions.
● It is normally weight sensitive.
● It has low restraint to horizontal motions (surge, sway and yaw), but is highly restrained in the vertical
direction (heave, roll and pitch).
● Higher order wave forces at different sum-frequencies may introduce resonant (springing) or transient
(ringing) responses in the vertical direction. These effects may significantly increase tendon loads.
● Restrained by the tendon system, the TLP-type floating substructure moves along a spherical surface.
This gives rise to the set-down effect, which is a kinematic coupling between the horizontal surge/
sway motions and the vertical heave motion. The magnitude of the set-down affects the wave air-gap,
tendon forces and power cable responses.
The TLP-type floating substructure generally experiences horizontal wave frequency motions of the same
order of magnitude as those of a semi-submersible of comparable size. On the other hand, the TLP-type
floating substructure behaves like a fixed structure with practically no wave frequency vertical motion
responses, because the wave frequency forces are counteracted by the stiffness of the tendon system.
The flexibility of the tower could have significant influences on the natural periods of roll and pitch
motions of the TLP-type floating substructure. The high frequency loads due to the rotor rotations and
aeroelastic responses of the RNA and the tower could introduce resonant and/or transient responses in the
vertical motions, which could significantly increase the tendon loads.
A Spar-type floating substructure typically consists of an upper hull, mid-section and lower hull. The upper
hull serves to provide buoyancy to support the topside and provides spaces for variable ballast. The mid-
section connects the upper hull with the lower hull. The mid-section can be a cylindrical column or a truss
space frame with heave plates. The heave plates are a series of horizontal decks between each bay of the
truss space frame and are designed to limit heave motions by providing added mass and hydrodynamic
damping. The lower hull normally consists of a fixed ballast tank and, in the case of a truss Spar, a
flotation tank. The fixed ballast tank provides temporary buoyancy during a horizontal wet tow and
provides the needed ballast in upending by flooding the tank. After upending, the ballast water may be
replaced by fixed ballast (a substance with a density higher than water) to lower the Spar’s center of
gravity. The ballast in the fixed ballast tank results in a vertical center of gravity well below the center of
buoyancy, which provides the Spar with sound stability, as well as desired motion characteristics. The
flotation tank is located adjacent to the fixed ballast tank to provide additional buoyancy for wet tow and
ballast in upending.
With a deep draft, the Spar-type floating substructure has a large area exposed to current forces, which is
usually the dominant mean force on a Spar. Low frequency vortex induced oscillations may increase the
effective drag leading to even higher mean current forces. By installing strakes on the Spar hull, the vortex
induced cross-flow oscillation can be mitigated. However, the strakes increase the added mass and the drag
forces on the Spar.
The Spar-type floating substructure is usually compliant to surge, sway, heave, roll, pitch, and yaw
motions. The natural periods of motions in all six degrees of freedom are usually outside the range of wave
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 15
TURBINES • 2020
Section 2 Characteristics of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines 2
periods. In addition, the Spar-type floating support structure has a low level of vertical wave excitation due
to its large draft, which exploits the fact that the first order wave motions and dynamic pressures decay
exponentially with depth. These result in very small heave motions.
Due to relatively small wave frequency motions, the Spar-type floating substructure is generally not
subjected to large dynamic mooring line forces, although their actual effect has to be evaluated by
considering the actual location of the fairlead and the increase in horizontal wave frequency motion
towards the waterline.
The mooring system for the Spar-type floating substructure can be in the form of catenary moorings, semi-
taut-line moorings or taut-line moorings. The motions and mooring loads of the catenary moored Spar-type
floating substructure are normally insensitive to the high frequency loads generated by the rotor rotations
and aeroelastic responses of the RNA and the tower.
Since the Spar-type floating substructure has a slender hull in the vertical direction and the mooring system
tends to have relatively low yaw stiffness, the Spar-type FOWT may experience yaw instability which
should be avoided.
Current forces could be significant on column-stabilized floating substructure due to the bluff shapes of
their underwater columns and pontoons.
The column-stabilized floating substructure is characterized by having free modes of motion, which means
that all natural periods of motion are outside the range of energetic wave periods. However, the wave
frequency motions of the column-stabilized floating substructure may be significant, especially in extreme
environmental conditions.
For the column-stabilized floating substructure, wave impact underneath the deck due to insufficient air-
gap may influence the global motions and local structural responses.
The spread mooring system in the form of the catenary, semi-taut lines or taut lines is normally adopted as
the stationkeeping system for the column-stabilized floating substructure. The column-stabilized floating
substructure with the catenary mooring system may experience significant dynamic mooring loads due to
the wave frequency responses. The motions and mooring loads of the catenary moored column-stabilized
floating substructure are normally insensitive to the high frequency loads generated by the rotor rotations
and aeroelastic responses of the RNA and the tower.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 16
TURBINES • 2020
Section 2 Characteristics of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines 2
5 Stationkeeping Systems
A stationkeeping system includes a mooring (tendon) system and an anchoring system. The mooring
system provides resistance to environmental loading by mobilizing reaction forces as the result of the gross
change in mooring geometry. It essentially works as a collection of spring mechanisms where
displacements of the floating substructure from its neutral equilibrium position introduce restoring forces
to react to the applied loading. Each mooring line acts as a tension spring and provides its intended
functions through one of the following two mechanisms:
● Hanging catenary effect due to gravity acting vertically on the mooring line
● Line elastic effect due to elastic stretch over the length of the mooring line
When FOWTs are expected to be deployed in relatively shallow water, in order for the mooring systems to
have the required stiffness, fiber ropes, clump weights and buoys may be used in addition to chains and
wire ropes.
The compliance of the catenary mooring line allowing for wave-induced floating support structure motions
is provided by a combination of geometrical change and axial elasticity of the lines. Large line geometrical
changes could lead to significant dynamic responses in the catenary mooring system due to the large
transverse drag loads.
The mooring lines in a catenary mooring system are commonly composed of steel rope and chain
segments. If necessary, clump weights and buoys may be used to achieve desired line configurations.
Transverse geometric changes in a taut mooring system are typically much smaller than those in a catenary
mooring system. Therefore, dynamic effects due to line drag loads are moderate.
Synthetic ropes have been used as mooring lines in taut mooring systems to provide required stiffness and
low weight. Compared to steel ropes, synthetic ropes exhibit more complex stiffness characteristics (e.g.,
hysteresis), which may significantly alter dynamic effects (see the ABS Guidance Notes on the Application
of Fiber Rope for Offshore Mooring).
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 17
TURBINES • 2020
Section 2 Characteristics of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines 2
5.7 Tendons
The TLP tendons are the vertical mooring lines similar to those in taut mooring systems. The main
difference is that tendons are traditionally made of tubes that are hardly compliant in the axial direction.
The TLP tendon system acts as an inverted pendulum, where the stationkeeping capacity is governed by
tendon length and pretension.
By restraining the FOWT at a draft deeper than what is required to balance its weight, the tendons are
typically under a continuous tensile load that provides a horizontal restoring force when the hull is
displaced laterally from its equilibrium position. With very high stiffness in the axial direction, the tendon
system limits heave, pitch, and roll responses of the hull to small amplitudes while its relatively compliant
transverse restraints can be designed to achieve surge, sway, and yaw responses within operationally
acceptable limits.
● Tubular Members with Threaded or other Mechanical Connectors. These members may be designed
to be completely void, partially void, or fully flooded. The tubular member and the connectors may be
fabricated as one piece, or assembled from separate tubular segments that are joined with threaded
connectors. The tendon components may be made of metal or fiber reinforced composites, with either
integral or metallic connectors.
● Tubular or Solid Rod Members with Welded Connections. The tubular members are fabricated from
seamless or rolled and welded steel and are designed to be welded together, prior to or during offshore
installation, to form a continuous tendon element.
● Tendon Strands. These tendons are fabricated from small diameter high tensile strength wire or fiber
strands and are formed into bundles. These tendons are designed to be installed offshore using a
continuous one-piece spooling operation to minimize the need for intermediate connectors.
The RNA control and safety system can optimize operations and keep the FOWT in a safe condition in the
event of malfunction. The control system keeps the FOWT within the normal operating limits. The safety
function of the system logically subordinates to the control function and is brought into action after safety-
relevant limiting values have been exceeded or if the control function is incapable of keeping the FOWT
within the normal operating limits. For detailed descriptions of control and safety systems, refer to IEC
61400-1, IEC 61400-3-1 and IEC TS 61400-3-2.
Due to its influence on mechanical loads, the performance of the control and safety system is critical not
only for the safety of service personnel and normal operations but the integrity of structures and
stationkeeping of the FOWT. The load-relevant functions of the control and safety system, which lead to
various RNA operational conditions, should be considered in the load analysis.
9 Coupling Effects
9.1 General
Coupling effects that should be considered in FOWT global performance analyses include:
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 18
TURBINES • 2020
Section 2 Characteristics of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines 2
The way of simulating these coupling effects is highly dependent on the actual software and analysis
approaches employed in global performance analyses and has to be evaluated on a case by case basis.
● Influences of the hull and the mooring system on the tower modal shapes and natural frequencies
● Influences of the tower flexibility on the hull pitch and roll motion, particularly for the TLP-type
FOWT
● Restoring forces include static restoring force from the mooring and electrical cable system as a
function of hull offset; current loading and its effects on the restoring force of the mooring and
electrical cable system; and seafloor frictions if mooring lines and/or electrical cables have contact
with the sea floor.
● Damping from the mooring lines and electrical cables due to their dynamics, current drag, etc.
● Additional inertia forces due to the mooring and electrical cable system
More discussions on this coupling effect can be found in API RP 2SK for applications in floating offshore
structures.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 19
TURBINES • 2020
SECTION 3 Modeling of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines
1 General
In general, dynamic analyses should be carried out to evaluate dynamic responses of the FOWT subjected
to site-specific external conditions and operating conditions. While various simplified analysis methods
may be used in the preliminary design, an integrated (coupled) dynamic analysis approach is recommended
for the final detailed design. Prototype tests and model tests may be used to supplement the load
calculation.
For the purpose of motion and load calculations in the global performance analysis, modeling of an FOWT
can be divided into the following areas:
● Environmental conditions
● Electrical network conditions
In addition, various fault conditions relevant to the electrical system, control and safety systems and
mechanical components should be properly modeled in the analysis.
● Hydrostatic loads
● Gravitational and inertial loads
● Wind, wave and current loads
● Other load effects, such as hull VIM and VIV
Buoyancy of a large-volume floating hull can be calculated directly using the wetted surface of the panel
element model created for radiation/diffraction analyses. When an analysis model includes both the panel
elements and Morison elements, the buoyancy could still be calculated by most commercial software if
actual locations and dimensions of the Morison elements are provided.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 20
TURBINES • 2020
Section 3 Modeling of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines 3
Correct modeling of metacentric heights (GML, GMT) is as important as modeling the location of the center
of buoyancy. Free surface effects in partially filled internal tanks should be taken into account in
determination of metacentric heights.
Stiffness contributions from moorings and cables should be appropriately taken into account. The mass
distribution of the hull can be represented by either a global mass matrix or a detailed mass distribution
(e.g. FE model). The input coordinate system normally depends on the software employed and its origin
may be placed at the vertical center of gravity or on the still water plane. Proper input of roll and pitch
radii of gyration is critical and requires a correct definition of reference axis systems.
A linear radiation/diffraction analysis is usually sufficient. The term ‘linear’ means that the average wetted
area of a floating structure (up to the water line) is used in the analysis. The main output of a radiation/
diffraction analysis gives first-order excitation forces, hydrostatics, potential damping, added mass, first-
order motions in 6 DOFs and second-order drift forces/moments. Such an analysis can also provide
information relevant to the slowly varying responses in roll and pitch that is important for FOWTs based
on Spars or other deep-draft floating structures, large Semi-submersibles and TLPs.
Low frequency vessel motions are caused, in part, by nonlinear second order drift forces. If the natural
period of FOWT motions is long (for instance, larger than 25 seconds), a linear frequency-domain solution
may be achieved by Newman’s approximation, which eliminates the off-diagonal terms in the QTF
(Quadratic Transfer Function) matrix. Newman’s approximation generally gives satisfactory results for low
frequency motions in the horizontal plane where the natural periods of FOWT motions are much longer
than the wave periods. For low frequency motions in the vertical plane, for example the pitch motion of a
Spar, Newman’s approximation may underestimate the second order drift forces. If such response is
deemed important for the design, time-domain analyses using a full QTF matrix may be required. When
the full QTF matrix approach is used, special attention should be paid to establishing a consistent damping
level.
Second-order wave forces at the sum-frequencies in a random sea-state could excite resonant responses in
heave, roll and pitch of the TLP-type FOWTs. Such resonant response, also known as springing, is a
stationary time-harmonic oscillation of the TLP-type FOWTs at a resonance period of one of the vertical
modes (i.e. heave, roll, pitch). In addition, the TLP-type FOWTs in deep water may experience very large
resonant high frequency transient ringing response. Time-domain analysis is typically performed to
evaluate these high frequency responses. There exist methods and computer tools for calculating the sum-
frequency QTF. The important aspects to be considered for springing analyses include:
Wave periods and wave headings should be selected such that motions and forces/moments can be
described as correctly as possible. Cancellation, amplification and resonance effects should be properly
captured. Modeling principles related to the panel mesh (size) should in general be followed, e.g.:
● Diagonal length in panel elements should not to be larger 20% of the smallest wave length analyzed.
● Fine panel mesh should be applied in areas with abrupt changes in geometry.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 21
TURBINES • 2020
Section 3 Modeling of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines 3
● Finer panel mesh should be applied towards the water-line in order to capture correct wave drift
excitations.
Hydrodynamic interactions between multiple (n) floating structures in close proximity may also be solved
using radiation/diffraction analyses, where the floating structures are normally solved in an integrated
system with motions in n × 6 DOFs.
Current conditions vary greatly in magnitude and direction at different site locations. In general, only
measurements can provide sufficient background for determination of design current speeds and directions.
Currents may induce VIV motions of the hull (i.e., hull VIM) as well as VIV oscillations of the mooring
lines and, therefore, has to be suitably considered. It is also important to apply appropriate drag
coefficients with due attention to conditions of the loading area as well as the damping effect. Sensitivity
checks using different sets of drag coefficients are therefore recommended.
Hull VIM can affect the mooring system design as well as the electrical cable design in terms of both
extreme loading and fatigue loading. Since VIV is a strongly non-linear phenomenon, model testing has
often been used to determine the hull VIM responses and calibrate the numerical simulations.
3.7 Instability
Mathieu’s instability may occur for dynamic systems with time dependent stiffness. Several effects may
cause such time dependent stiffness. Specifically for the FOWT, there are two scenarios that may trigger
instability:
The heave/pitch-coupled instability in the second scenario could be critical for a single column hull with
relatively low heave damping.
Instability can be identified through numerical simulations and/or model and field testing.
The wind loads on the tower should be included. When wind loads on the FOWT are analyzed, the
influence of the tower shadow or tower upwind effects on the wind field perturbation should be properly
modeled.
The dynamic structural response of the tower may be obtained by modal superposition. Sufficient modes
should be included in the analysis. As a minimum, the first few orders bending modes should be included.
If the tower does not have sufficient torsional stiffness, torsional modes should also be included in the
modeling. Modal analyses of the tower should take into account influences of floating foundations.
For some types of FOWTs, such as a catenary-moored Spar-type or Semi-submersible-type FOWT, the
tower may be modeled as part of the rigid body of the floating support structure in preliminary mooring
system designs. However, the tower flexibility should be adequately modeled for the final detailed design.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 22
TURBINES • 2020
Section 3 Modeling of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines 3
7.1 General
There are mainly two approaches for mooring system analysis (i.e., quasi-static analysis and dynamic
analysis). Both methods can be pursued in either the frequency domain or the time domain. The time-
domain dynamic method is usually required to account for nonlinearity and dynamic effects of the mooring
(or tendon) system.
The formulation for modeling the mooring (or tendon) system is mainly based on the finite element
method (FEM) or the lumped-mass method.
● Nonlinear Stretching Behavior of the Mooring Line. The strain or tangential stretch of the mooring line
is a function of the tension magnitude. Nonlinearity occurs mostly in synthetic materials such as
polyester, while chain and wire rope can be regarded as linear. In many cases, this nonlinearity is
simplified by a linearized behavior using a representative tangent or secant modulus.
● Changes in Geometry. The geometric nonlinearity is associated with large variations of the mooring
line shape.
● Fluid Loading. The Morison equation is most frequently used to represent fluid loading effects on
mooring lines. The drag force on the line is nonlinear because it is proportional to the square of the
relative velocity between the fluid and the line.
● Bottom Effects. In many mooring designs, a considerable portion of the mooring line is in contact with
the seafloor. The interaction between the line and the seafloor is usually considered to be a nonlinear
frictional process. In addition, the length of grounded line segment constantly changes, causing an
interaction between this nonlinearity and the geometric nonlinearity.
In the time-domain method, it is possible to model the non-linear effects described above - the elastic
stretch can be mathematically modeled, the full Morison equation can be implemented, the position of the
mooring line can be updated at each time step, and the bottom interaction can be simulated using a
frictional model. Such a time-domain analysis requires recalculating mass, damping, and stiffness matrices
and loading at each time step. Hence, the computation can become complex and time consuming.
The frequency-domain method, on the other hand, is always linear because of the principle of linear
superposition. Hence, all sources of non-linearity should be simplified by either a direct linearization
approach or an iterative linearization approach.
● 3D formulation
● Conventional small strain slender beam and bar elements capable of considering material and
geometric stiffness and nonlinear material properties
● Hull/mooring (or tendon) connection formulation
● Seafloor/mooring line contact formulation
● Seabed/tendon connection formulation
● Structural damping formulation
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 23
TURBINES • 2020
Section 3 Modeling of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines 3
● Hydrodynamic loading according to the Morison equation expressed by the relative water/structure
velocity and acceleration
● Regular and irregular loading due to waves and hull structure motions.
● Current modeling
● Capability of modeling mooring components such as swivels, hinges, buoyancy modules, clump
weights, flex-joints, etc.
● Capability of modeling constant (or variable) line tension devices
● Nonlinear static analysis
● Eigenvalue analysis
● Nonlinear time-domain dynamic analysis
The computational efforts of nonlinear time-domain dynamic analysis can be substantial. This is in
particular the case for irregular wave analyses where long simulations are typically required to estimate
extreme responses with sufficient statistical confidence. It is therefore beneficial to apply simplified
analysis approaches as a supplement to achieve more efficient computer analyses (e.g., linearized time-
domain analysis, frequency-domain analysis, etc.).
The drive train includes all torque-transmitting components from the rotor to the generator including the
elastic mounting of the drive train. The parameterization assumptions of the drive train model used in the
global load calculation should be verified by the calculation using more detailed drive train models. In
most cases, the controlling parameters are ‘resulting drive train stiffness’ and ‘moment of inertia of
generator rotor’. The verification can also be carried out through the comparison of the first eigen-
frequency obtained from the detailed drive train model to the corresponding value derived from the global
load simulation model. Other verification techniques can also be used, if appropriate.
11.1 General
The rotor blades can in general be modeled based on linear elastic theory. However, non-linear
relationships between loads and load effects should be properly accounted for, where they are deemed
important. As a minimum, the edgewise and flapwise bending degrees of freedom should be considered in
the evaluation of aero-elastic responses. Structural damping of the rotor blades should also be properly
selected.
Modeling of rotor blades and control and safety systems should include the following loads and load
effects:
The influence of the control system on the loads, especially aerodynamic loads should be properly
modeled. The interaction of the turbine control system with the low frequency motions of the hull structure
should be incorporated into the control system design and load analysis. Resonance and dynamic
amplification of motions due to control system actions should be avoided.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 24
TURBINES • 2020
Section 3 Modeling of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines 3
The combined effects of inertial, gravitational and aerodynamic loads of the RNA for a three-blade
horizontal axis wind turbine include the following frequency components:
In dynamic analyses, structural dynamics properties and the coupling of vibratory modes should be
properly modeled. The following items should be taken into account:
The calculation method for aerodynamic loads on rotor blades is normally based on the blade element
momentum theory (BEM). Other methods such as potential flow method, computational fluid dynamics
(CFD), etc., may also be used. In addition, aerodynamic loads on the nacelle should be taken into account,
if deemed important.
The following aspects should be taken into account regarding wind loads on the RNA:
● Wind field perturbations due to the offshore wind turbine itself (wake-induced velocities, tower
shadow, tower upwind effect etc.)
● The influence of three-dimensional flow on the blade aerodynamic characteristics (e.g., three-
dimensional stall and aerodynamic tip loss)
● Dynamic stall effects of the airflow for the profiles used
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 25
TURBINES • 2020
Section 3 Modeling of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines 3
● Static and load-dependent bearing friction moments (especially those at the blade pitch bearing and the
yaw bearing)
● Behavior of the control and safety systems of the RNA
The mutual influence of offshore wind turbines through the wake interaction behind the rotor should be
considered in a wind farm configuration up to a distance of at least 10 rotor diameters from another
FOWT. Reference can be made to IEC 61400-1 for guidance on the wake effects from neighboring wind
turbines.
As appropriate, the global yawing moment exerted on the floating support structure due to unbalanced
rotor aerodynamic loads caused by the shade effect or the wake effect of neighboring FOWTs should also
be considered. Such global yawing moment may be assessed separately and added to the total RNA
aerodynamic loads.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 26
TURBINES • 2020
SECTION 4 Determination of Environmental Loads
The 10-minute mean wind speed at hub height (i.e., Vhub as defined in 4-2/3 of the FOWT Guide) and the
wind models defined in 4-2 of the FOWT Guide are used in the definition of design load conditions in
Section 5-2 of the FOWT Guide.
For FOWTs installed in a wind farm, the potential shadow effect and wake effect on the loads should be
considered for both the strength and fatigue analyses. Guidelines for modeling of wind farm wake effects
can be found in 3/13.
F = 1/2 ρwCddv2
where
F = force per unit length normal to the local mooring line, in N/m (lb/ft)
ρw = density of the seawater, in kg/m3 (slug/ft3)
Cd = drag coefficient
d = nominal diameter of the mooring line, in m (ft)
v = component of current velocity normal to the local mooring line, in m/s (ft/s)
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 27
TURBINES • 2020
Section 4 Determination of Environmental Loads 4
Where there are high currents, the drag coefficient should be adjusted for the presence of vortex-induced
vibrations.
● Steady loads such as wind, current and wave drift forces that are constant in magnitude and direction
for the duration of interest.
● Low frequency cyclic loads (often referred to as slow drift) with characteristic periods between 1 and
10 minutes. Low frequency cyclic loads typically induce dynamic excitations of the floating support
structures at their natural periods of surge, sway, yaw and, in the case of the Spar-type FOWTs, pitch
and roll.
● Wave frequency cyclic loads with typical periods ranging from 3 to 30 seconds. Wave frequency
cyclic loads result in wave frequency motions, which are normally independent of mooring stiffness.
The approach of neglecting mooring stiffness in wave frequency motion calculations is considered
relatively conservative. However for small floating structures such as buoys where the first order wave
loads are not large, accounting for mooring stiffness can yield more realistic wave frequency motions.
In addition, if the natural period of the FOWT is close to the wave periods, the wave frequency
motions could be dependent on the mooring stiffness. In this case the effect of stiffness should be
properly accounted for.
● High-frequency cyclic loads with characteristic periods from 1 to 5 seconds. High-frequency cyclic
loads typically induce dynamic excitation of the TLP-type floating substructures at their natural
periods of heave, roll and pitch.
● High frequency vibration due to tower and RNA dynamic loads with frequency higher than 0.5 hz
(periods lower than 2 seconds). Such high frequency loads may be transmitted to the TLP-type
floating substructure and its tendon system.
Calculation of environmental loads on the floating offshore structure can be found in API RP2SK, API RP
2T, and ISO 19901-7, with general guidance given below.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 28
TURBINES • 2020
Section 4 Determination of Environmental Loads 4
For wind drag loads normal to flat surfaces, such as nacelle and boat landing, or normal to the axis of
members not having flat surfaces, such as the tower and the floating substructure, the wind loading can be
considered either as a steady wind force or as a combination of steady and time-varying load calculated
from a suitable wind spectrum. Where one structural member shields another from direct exposure to the
wind, shielding may be taken into account. Generally, the two structural components should be separated
by not more than seven times the width of the windward component for a reduction to be taken in the wind
load on the leeward member.
Cyclic loads due to vortex induced vibrations of structural members should be investigated if applicable.
Both drag and lift components of load due to vortex induced vibrations should be taken into account. The
effects of wind loading on structural members or components that are not normally exposed to wind loads
after installation should be considered where applicable. This would especially apply to load-out or
transportation phases.
For the floating substructure consisting of large (columns and pontoons) and small (brace members)
cylindrical members, a combination of diffraction and Morison’s equation may be used for calculation of
hydrodynamic characteristics and hydrodynamic loading. Alternatively, suitable model test results or full
scale measurements can be used.
For installation sites where the ratio of water depth to wave length is less than 0.25, nonlinear effects of
wave action should be taken into account. This may be fulfilled by modifying linear diffraction theory to
account for nonlinear effects or by performing model tests. Wave force calculations should account for
shallow water effects which increase current due to blockage effects, change the system natural frequency
due to nonlinear behavior of moorings and alter wave kinematics.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 29
TURBINES • 2020
Section 4 Determination of Environmental Loads 4
The amount of accumulation assumed for design should reflect the extent of and interval between cleaning
of submerged structural parts.
These effects should be taken into account for strength and fatigue design of FOWT stationkeeping
systems. The occurrence of the Loop Current and associated eddies in the Gulf of Mexico make
consideration of VIM particularly important for this geographic area. For example, unlike other extreme
events, e.g. winter storms and hurricanes, the Loop Current and associated eddies could affect a particular
site for an extended period of time and thus cause a significant fatigue damage accumulation in mooring
components.
Earthquake ground motions should be described by either applicable ground motion records or response
spectra consistent with the return period appropriate to the design life of the structure. Available
standardized spectra applicable to the region of the installation site are acceptable provided such spectra
reflect site-specific conditions affecting frequency content, energy distribution, and duration. These
conditions include:
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 30
TURBINES • 2020
Section 4 Determination of Environmental Loads 4
As appropriate, effects of soil liquefaction, shear failure of soft mud and loads due to acceleration of the
hydrodynamic added mass by the earthquake, submarine slide, tsunamis and earthquake generated acoustic
shock waves should be taken into account.
13 Ice Loads
Ice loads acting on an FOWT are both static and dynamic loads. Static loads are normally generated by
temperature fluctuations or changes in water level in a fast ice cover. Dynamic loads are caused by moving
ice interactions with the floating support structure. The global forces exerted by ice on the global floating
support structure and local concentrated loads on structural elements should be considered. The effects of
rubble piles on the development of larger areas and their forces on the floating support structure should be
considered. Further reference is made to API RP 2N and ISO 19906.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 31
TURBINES • 2020
SECTION 5 Definition of Analysis Methodologies
In the calculation of FOWT wave frequency responses, linear wave theory is usually employed, while
more sophisticated methods may be employed to model finite amplitude waves. The low frequency motion
analysis should be carried out to evaluate the responses to wind dynamics and wave drift forces. The
damping levels used in such analyses should be properly determined and documented. For the TLP-type
floating support structure, where second-order sum-frequency effects are deemed significant, the high
frequency springing responses of the floating substructure and tendons should be evaluated.
Frequency-domain analyses for evaluating aerodynamic responses of the RNA and effects of turbine
control systems should be properly formulated. Preferably, combined aerodynamic, hydrodynamic and
control system actions in the frequency domain are used in the calculation of FOWT dynamic responses.
Frequency-domain analyses, by nature, cannot capture nonlinear dynamic interactions among the
components and subsystems of the FOWT. Methods of approximating nonlinearity in the frequency
domain and their limitations should be investigated to justify that they can provide acceptable solutions for
the intended application. Frequency-domain analyses are also unable to take into account transient
responses as well as nonlinear aerodynamic and hydrodynamic load effects. Because of these limitations,
most of currently available simulation software for FOWTs is based on the time-domain analysis approach
as described in 5/1.3. Frequency-domain analyses are normally performed to calculate the hydrodynamic
coefficients which are used as input to time-domain analyses.
Time-domain analyses consist of numerically solving the equations of motion in the time domain for the
FOWT subjected to environmental conditions and the RNA operational loads. As the input to time-domain
analyses, time series of wind and wave conditions are generated to simulate turbulent wind conditions and
stochastic wave elevations and kinematics.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 32
TURBINES • 2020
Section 5 Definition of Analysis Methodologies 5
Time-domain analyses are the preferable approach for FOWT global performance analyses, primarily
because they can provide a rational means of modeling the nonlinear and transient effects in FOWT global
responses. These nonlinear effects include, but are not limited to, hydrodynamic drag forces, finite wave
amplitude effects, nonlinear restoring forces from moorings as described in 3/7.3, and effects of motion
suppression devices or components (e.g., heave plates). Time-domain analyses also allow modeling of the
coupling effects among responses of the turbine RNA, the tower, the floating substructure, the
stationkeeping system and the export power cable.
Time-domain analyses should be carried out for a sufficiently long time to achieve stationary statistics,
particularly for low frequency responses. Multiple realizations of an individual set of stochastic site
conditions may be necessary in order to generate adequate data for statistical analysis and to verify
consistency of the simulation. The most probable maximum responses should be predicted using
appropriate distribution curve fitting or other recognized statistical techniques.
For the TLP-type floating substructure, the ringing (the high frequency vertical vibration excited by
impulsive loading) and the springing (the high frequency vertical vibration excited by cyclic loading at or
near the resonant periods) responses of the TLP hull and the tendon should be considered as appropriate.
Further guidance on high frequency ringing and spring analyses can be found in API RP 2T.
The effect of Vortex Induced Motions (VIM, see 4/7.9) for the floating substructure in the form of Spar,
single column TLP or other types of deep-draft hull structure should be taken into account as appropriate.
● Motion analysis
● Air gap analysis
● Mooring analysis
To reduce the complexity and computational effort associated with full time-domain simulations,
combined time- and frequency-domain analyses are often employed. Typically, the mean and low
frequency responses (hull displacements, mooring line tensions, anchor loads, etc.) are computed in the
time domain while the wave frequency responses are solved separately in the frequency domain. The
frequency-domain solution of wave frequency responses is normally processed to obtain either statistical
peak values or time series, which are then superimposed on the mean and low frequency responses.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 33
TURBINES • 2020
Section 5 Definition of Analysis Methodologies 5
Either frequency-domain or time-domain analyses can be used to predict dynamic responses of the
mooring system.
When an integrated (coupled) model is used for global performance analyses, coupling effects among
responses of the turbine RNA, the tower, the floating substructure, the stationkeeping system and the
subsea power cable can be taken into account at each incremental analysis time step. A more realistic
simulation of the effects of the turbine control system and turbine’s operating conditions can also be
achieved using this approach.
The hull, mooring system and, if needed, power cables are dynamically coupled in this approach.
The same load model may be applied for the hull in coupled, semi-coupled or uncoupled analyses.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 34
TURBINES • 2020
SECTION 6 Global Motion Analysis
The steady or mean forces result in the mean offset of the FOWT. The low frequency forces excite the
motions which are at frequencies lower than wave frequencies but close to the surge, sway or yaw natural
frequencies of the floating substructure. The wave frequency forces excite wave frequency surge and sway
motions. Because of its weathervaning nature, the FOWT with a single point mooring may experience
large low frequency yaw motions. These yaw motions may significantly affect FOWT and mooring system
responses, and therefore should be taken into account in global motion analyses and model testing.
Global motion analyses are normally performed in conjunction with mooring (or tendon) analyses.
However, they may also be carried out separately when only global motions are of interest. In such cases,
either the quasi-static or the dynamic analysis approach can be used to analyze the mooring system in
global motion analyses. If the quasi-static analysis approach is used, special attention should be given to
the appropriate simulation of the coupling effects.
The following steady forces should be taken into account in the analysis:
● Mean Wind Forces. Mean wind forces should be calculated using the average wind speed measured for
an extended period, normally on the order of one hour, under a given design environmental condition.
● Current Forces. The drag forces on the mooring lines (or tendons) and cables subject to the current
under a given design environmental condition should be included in the calculation of total steady
forces.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 35
TURBINES • 2020
Section 6 Global Motion Analysis 6
● Steady Wave Drift Forces. Steady wave drift forces acting on the hull due to wave diffractions and
second-order viscous effects. The interaction between waves and currents can also result in steady
forces which should be considered.
In frequency-domain analyses, assuming that low frequency wind and wave forces are independent, the
total low frequency force spectrum is given by the sum of the low frequency wave force spectrum and the
low frequency wind force spectrum. This total force spectrum can then be multiplied by appropriate
motion transfer functions to obtain desired motions.
In time-domain analyses, because low frequency motions are dominated by the surge, sway and yaw
resonances with natural periods typically ranging from 60 to 150 seconds, a long simulation duration is
required to obtain a sufficient number of cycles for developing an accurate estimate of the statistical
extreme. Time histories of low frequency forces could be generated either from wind and wave force
spectra or directly from wind velocity and wave profile time histories.
The estimation of damping is important because low frequency motions are dominated by resonant
responses. Further discussion of damping is provided in 6/13.
13 Damping
● Aerodynamic damping
● Viscous damping of the floating support structure (tower and floating substructure), including wind,
wave, and current drag
● Wave drift damping of the floating substructure
● Mooring system damping
● Cable system damping
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 36
TURBINES • 2020
Section 6 Global Motion Analysis 6
The technology for estimating viscous damping has well been established, and viscous damping is
normally included in the low frequency motion calculations. Wave drift damping, mooring system
damping, and cable system damping, however, are more complex and are sometimes neglected because of
a lack of understanding. Nevertheless, these damping components could be important and neglecting them
may lead to significant over-estimation of low frequency motions. Where low frequency motions are
considered important, it may be warranted to evaluate the damping from all these sources either by
appropriate analytical approaches or model testing.
15 Analysis Methods
For global motion analysis the following approaches may be used:
● Frequency-domain analyses
● Time-domain analyses
● Combined time-domain and frequency-domain analyses
When the frequency-domain approach is used to compute the hull motion responses, the extreme values of
the motion responses are defined as the mean plus or minus the maximum estimated value of the time-
varying excursion due to combined wave frequency and low frequency hull motions.
The extreme values of the hull motion, Smax and Smin can be determined by:
where
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 37
TURBINES • 2020
Section 6 Global Motion Analysis 6
The total offset should be defined as the vector sum of the individual offset components of different
degrees of freedom (e.g., surge and sway). The total heel should be defined as the vector sum of the
individual component angles of different degrees of freedom (e.g., roll and pitch).
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 38
TURBINES • 2020
SECTION 7 Air Gap Analysis
In the air gap analysis, the following global hull motions should be considered:
High frequency motions and vibrations, as well as the tower flexibility, may be neglected for the air gap
analysis.
For the wave crest height, the nonlinearity of wave profile, wave diffraction and run-up, tide and water
level effects, and variations of draft of the floating support structure should be considered.
General guidance for air gap and wave crest effects assessment can be found in in API RP 2FPS for semi-
submersibles and spars and API RP 2T for TLPs.
● Frequency-domain analyses
● Time-domain analyses
● Combined time-domain and frequency-domain analyses
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 39
TURBINES • 2020
Section 7 Air Gap Analysis 7
For TLP-type FOWTs, the minimum air gap, also known as the deck clearance, is governed by a
combination of an increasing water level and a decreasing deck height. The increasing water level is
caused by incident wave elevation, tide, storm surge, and radiation/diffraction effects from the hull. In very
steep sea conditions, the diffraction effects could be significant. The decreasing deck elevation is caused by
the hull set-down with offset. The hull set-down increases nonlinearly at large offsets, leading to a rapid
decrease of the deck clearance with increasing environmental severity. In this case, the correction to the
prediction of offset should be made.
Radiated or diffracted waves generally cause local wave impacts on the deck. In some cases, local impacts
may need to be accounted for in the design and, as a result, may lead to local structural stiffening,
increased weight of the deck, and tendon ringing, which affects the peak loads in the tendons and the porch
structure. Increased tendon load responses could also affect the minimum tension, which in turn affects the
design pretension.
The deck height could significantly affect the vertical position of the center of gravity and, in turn, the
maximum and minimum tendon tensions. The deck elevation also affects the wind load and wind
overturning moments. In general, a higher deck contributes adversely to the tendon tensions. On the other
hand, if the deck does not have a sufficient air gap, large tendon tension variations could occur when
waves strike the deck.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 40
TURBINES • 2020
SECTION 8 Mooring Strength Analysis
The mooring line diameter used in the mooring analysis should be the nominal value (i.e., inclusive of
corrosion and wear allowance) when calculating mass, weight and hydrodynamic loads of the mooring
line, unless otherwise noted. Installation tolerances of anchor placement and line length should be taken
into account in the mooring system design.
Dynamic excitations originating from the floating support structure, including the tower and the floating
substructure and the RNA, could result in mooring system responses in the following distinct frequency
bands:
● Mean responses
● Low frequency responses
● Wave frequency responses
● High frequency responses for the tendons or taut lines
● Vibrations induced by the loads exerted by the tower and the RNA, if applicable.
Responses of the mooring system to mean forces can be predicted by a static model of the mooring system.
In general, the responses to low frequency motions can also be predicted by a static model because of the
long periods of these motions. The responses to wave and high frequency hull motions and hull vibrations
may be predicted by either quasi-static or dynamic analyses. However, the quasi-static analysis method
should only be used in preliminary designs. In final detailed designs, dynamic analyses should be
employed.
● Frequency-domain analyses
● Time-domain analyses
● Combined time-domain and frequency-domain analyses
These methods incorporate different degrees of approximation and are affected by various limitations, and
therefore do not necessarily yield consistent results. If verification of the approach selected for the mooring
design is required, model test data or an alternative approach of similar reliability should be used.
Because there is no established analytical method for determining FOWT motion responses undergoing
VIM, model testing should, in general, be performed if VIM is deemed important in the design. In the case
that current loads and VIM are determined to be important, it is usual practice to perform well planned
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 41
TURBINES • 2020
Section 8 Mooring Strength Analysis 8
model tests to determine motion amplitudes and drag coefficients for use in mooring designs. Full-scale in-
field measurement data may be employed to confirm the scalability of model testing.
In general, time-domain analyses are recommended for the mooring strength analysis. When the effects of
high frequency motions and vibrations are expected to be relatively insignificant, frequency-domain
analyses may yield satisfactory results and the analysis procedures in this case are similar to those
described in API RP 2SK.
Where the floating substructure has a small water plane area, alternative procedures incorporating all six
DOFs of motion should be used.
To obtain extreme (maximum) values, the combination of different components of the motions and
mooring line tensions may follow the approach recommended in API RP 2SK.
In general, the fully coupled (integrated) analysis approach is preferred for the following two important
advantages:
● Low frequency damping from the hull, mooring lines and cables can be internally generated in the
simulation; and
● Coupling between the floating substructure, the tower, the turbine RNA and control system, the
stationkeeping system, and the cable system can be fully accounted for.
The fully coupled analysis approach should be used with a time-domain mooring analysis tool that is
capable of solving the equations of motion for the combined responses of the floating substructure, the
tower, the turbine RNA and control system, the stationkeeping system, and, if applicable, the cable system.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 42
TURBINES • 2020
Section 8 Mooring Strength Analysis 8
the absence of wave frequency components. Damping will need to be evaluated separately and treated as
an input parameter.
Wave frequency hull motions are calculated separately in the frequency domain using the hull’s motion
RAOs and a given wave spectrum. These wave frequency motions may be combined with the low
frequency motions in two ways:
● Method 1: The frequency-domain solution of wave frequency hull motions is first transformed to a
time history, which is then superimposed to the mean and low frequency hull displacement time
histories to obtain the combined hull displacement. In this process, the seed values for generating the
wave frequency and low frequency time histories should be the same.
● Method 2: The mean and low frequency motion time histories are statistically analyzed to determine
the peak values, which are then combined with the peak values of the wave frequency motions to
calculate the maximum hull offset, as described in API RP 2SK.
i) Determine environmental criteria relevant to the global performance analysis of a specific FOWT
stationkeeping system (see Section 8-2 of the ABS FOWT Guide)
ii) Determine the external electrical network conditions
iii) Identify the mooring pattern, the characteristics of chain, wire and fiber rope to be deployed, and
the initial tension
iv) Define corrosion and wear allowance of the chain and wire rope used in analysis
v) Determine the tower dimensions, properties, modal shapes, and wind force coefficients
vi) Define the RNA and control system configuration and create the models to be used in the
simulation
vii) Identify the start-up and shut-down procedures and the associated settings of turbine RNA and
control system
viii) Identify the fault conditions in the RNA and control system
ix) Define the hull structure’s wind and current force coefficients, and create the hydrodynamic model
of the FOWT system including the hull, stationkeeping system and, if necessary, power cables
x) Perform time-domain simulations for the expected storm duration using a time-domain mooring
analysis program and applying different seed values for generating the wave and wind time
histories.
xi) Perform statistical analyses to establish expected extreme values of hull offset, line tension,
anchor loads, and grounded line length.
xii) Check the extreme hull offset, line tension, anchor load, and grounded line length from step xi)
against the design criteria (see 8/7, 8/9 and 8/11).
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 43
TURBINES • 2020
Section 8 Mooring Strength Analysis 8
For the TLP-type FOWT, minimum tendon tension should be checked against the design criteria in 8-3/3
of the FOWT Guide.
For catenary moorings with drag anchors not specifically designed to withstand uplift forces, the minimum
length of each grounded line (i.e., the mooring line segment always resting on the sea floor) should be
computed and compared with a design criterion to be prescribed on a site-specific basis.
For anchors designed to withstand uplift forces, compliance with appropriate design criteria applicable to
that specific type of anchor should be verified.
For some types of mooring line, the grounded line is highly undesirable and, therefore, the portion of the
line closest to the anchor is typically replaced by a chain. In such cases, the minimum elevation of the line-
to-chain connection should be computed and verified against a minimum elevation criterion prescribed on
a site-specific basis.
For some types of mooring lines, exposure to the splash zone or to friction against the fairleads is
undesirable and, therefore, the upper portion of the line is typically replaced by a chain. In such cases, the
position of the upper termination should be evaluated and compared with a minimum depth criterion
prescribed on a site-specific basis.
For the mooring lines in proximity to other underwater and surface installations, additional clearance
requirements and geometric constraints may apply. In such cases, displacements at particular points of
concern should be verified against applicable design criteria or be prescribed on a site-specific basis.
Guidance on line length and geometry constraints for fiber rope mooring lines can be found in the ABS
Guidance Notes on the Application of Fiber Rope for Offshore Mooring.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 44
TURBINES • 2020
SECTION 9 Mooring Fatigue Analysis
Miner’s Rule can be used to determine accumulated fatigue damage. For main components of the mooring
lines (i.e., chain, wire rope and connecting links), Miner’s Rule may be implemented in terms of tension
range (the T-N curve approach) as described below, or stress range (the S-N curve approach). For other
structural components of the stationkeeping system, such as anchor pile details and attachments, the S-N
approach is normally used.
T-N curves for chain and wire rope can be found in API RP 2SK. Special considerations of fiber rope
fatigue analysis can be found in the ABS Guidance Notes on the Application of Fiber Rope for Offshore
Mooring.
In addition to the tension-tension induced fatigue, the tension-bending induced fatigue for chain and wire
rope should be properly considered according to recognized industry criteria such as API RP 2SK. ABS
Guide for Position Mooring Systems provides requirements for the bending and tension induced fatigue for
chain and wire rope in 1/7.5.3 and guidance on the mooring chain fatigue due to bending in A3.
As indicated in 8-3/3 of the ABS FOWT Guide, corrosion and wear should be suitably considered in the
fatigue analysis. The general guidance is given in 9/3 of these Guidance Notes.
In the mooring fatigue analysis, due consideration should be given to the following aspects:
Either time- or frequency-domain dynamic analysis approaches may be applied for mooring tension range
predictions. It is suggested that time-domain coupled analyses along with rain-flow counting method be
used in the mooring fatigue analysis. Alternatively, mooring tension ranges may be obtained from model
testing.
In general, quasi-static analyses should not be used to calculate tension ranges due to its deficiency in
estimating wave frequency mooring tensions.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 45
TURBINES • 2020
Section 9 Mooring Fatigue Analysis 9
Guideline for the mooring fatigue analysis can be found in ABS Guide for Position Mooring Systems, API
RP 2SK and API RP 2T. Appendix A2 of ABS Guide for Position Mooring Systems, Appendix H of API
RP 2SK and API RP 2T provide guidance on the hull VIM induced mooring fatigue.
3 T-N Curve
The fatigue life of a mooring line component is calculated by comparing the long-term cyclic loading in
that component with its resistance to fatigue damage. For mooring systems, the T-N curve approach is
commonly used to determine the number of cycles to failure for a specific mooring component as a
function of constant normalized tension range. The T-N curve for a specific type of mooring component is
established based on experimental results.
N ⋅ Tm = K
where
When determining the reference breaking strength of the mooring chain or connecting links, the diameter
for different periods of service life can be established if the corrosion and wear rate can be predicted. If the
corrosion and wear rate is uncertain, a conservative approach using the nominal diameter minus the
corrosion and wear allowance should be considered for the fatigue analysis. The reference breaking
strength for a wire rope should be its minimum breaking strength (MBS).
D = ∑ii = k
= 1 Di
where
The Miner’s Rule should be used to calculate the annual cumulative fatigue damage ratio Di:
nj
Di = ∑ N
j
where
nj = number of tension cycles within the tension range interval j encountered in the design state i
per year
Nj = number of cycles to failure under the normalized tension range j per year as determined by the
T-N curve
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 46
TURBINES • 2020
Section 9 Mooring Fatigue Analysis 9
The discretization into i = 1,…,k design states should have a sufficient resolution to avoid any significant
error due to the discretization. Each design state is defined in terms of the wind, wave, and current
parameters and directions as well as the RNA operating condition required to compute the mooring system
responses. The probability of occurrence, Pi, should be determined for each design state. The calculated
fatigue life of the mooring system is:
L = 1/ D years
The annual fatigue damage accumulated in each individual design state can be computed as:
ni
Di = KE Rim
where
E Rim = expected value of the normalized tension range Ri raised to the power of m in the design state i per year
The number of tension cycles per year in each design state is:
where
The effects of pretension and environmental loads due to wind, wave and current as well as the RNA
operating conditions should be considered when determining the normalized tension ranges. Total fatigue
damage should be calculated with consideration of the fatigue damage from various fatigue load cases as
described in 5-2 of the FOWT Guide. When suitably qualified, previously used mooring components are
considered for re-use, fatigue damage from previous operations should be taken into account.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 47
TURBINES • 2020
Section 9 Mooring Fatigue Analysis 9
In addition to the conventional fatigue life calculation using a set of design states based on discretized
long-term environmental conditions and the turbine’s operational conditions, the tendon components
should demonstrate robustness against low-cycle, high-stress fatigue due to more prolonged events that
exceed the probabilistic predictions.
In order to assure a minimum level of robustness, tendon fatigue damage should be assessed for all
components considering a single event based on the 50-year return extreme storm, including the ramp-up
and ramp down before and after the storm. The duration to consider should be determined by the designer
based on the data available and the response characteristics of the components. The unfactored damage
accumulated during this event should be no more than 0.02.
Other 50-year return period events that may induce substantial tendon fatigue, such as the Loop Currents in
the Gulf of Mexico, should also be considered in the same manner.
Damage calculated for single event fatigue should not be added to the damage predicted in the long-term
scatter-diagram-based fatigue analysis, nor compared to the associated safety factors. The intent, as a
robustness check, is to screen for components that may incur excessive fatigue damage in prolonged
extreme environmental conditions.
Fatigue analysis for tendon components should consider local load effects in addition to global loads.
Reference is made to API RP 2T for more details for tendon fatigue analysis.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 48
TURBINES • 2020
SECTION 10 Suggestions for Numerical Simulations
1 General
In numerical simulations of global performance analyses, appropriate settings of the following parameters
are crucial in order to obtain reliable results:
● Time step
● Transient time or ramp time
● Grid size and range for wind field data generation
● Number of wave components for generating random waves
● For the deterministic events, the onset time of the events
● For the stochastic events, the number of simulations with different random seeds and the time duration
of each simulation
● For fatigue sea states, the discretization of fatigue bins
● Setting of the control system, generator, blade pitch, nacelle yaw, rotor azimuth angle, rotor speed and
degrees-of-freedoms for drive train, tower and blade flexibilities for different turbine operating or
parked conditions
● Parameters for the aerodynamic load calculation, especially the tower shadow model and the static or
dynamic stall models
● Wind average speed, turbulence intensity, wind shear for different wind models used in the wind field
data generation
Sensitivity analysis may be performed to determine the discretization of the fatigue bins.
For load cases involving start-up and shut-down of the RNA, analysis procedure should be consistent with
the actual operational procedure of the RNA.
3 Time Step
Choice of time step is crucial for the stability and accuracy of time-domain solution, and is often
dependent on the periods of the responses, degree of nonlinearity, and analysis formulation. Time step
should be determined by a sensitivity check.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 49
TURBINES • 2020
Section 10 Suggestions for Numerical Simulations 10
Since initial conditions used for the dynamic analysis could affect the statistics of the response during the
starting part of the simulation time duration, the first 5 seconds to 10 minutes (or longer, if necessary,
depending on the period and damping of the response) of time history data should be discarded when
stochastic wind and/or wave are applied.
TABLE 1
Adjustment of Wind Conditions with Different Averaging Time Durations
(1 July 2020)
Notes:
1 Adjustments are applied to the hub height wind conditions.
2 Adjustment for the turbulence intensity is valid for the wind spectra recommended in IEC 61400-3-1. For the
NPD (Frøya) wind spectrum and tropical cyclone wind spectrum, see the guidance provided in this Subsection.
3 For 3-hour simulations, additional guidance is provided in this Subsection.
When using the IEC-recommended wind spectrum to perform a 3-hour simulation, the following methods
may be used to generate wind field data:
● Method 1: Use 1-hour mean wind speed and turbulence intensity to generate time series of a turbulent
wind field for 3 hours
● Method 2: Use 3-hour mean wind speed and adjust the turbulence intensity (or use site measurement
data) to generate time series of turbulent wind field for 3 hours such that the resultant maximum wind
loads or load effects match those obtained using either 10-minute or 1-hour simulations.
The adjustment relative to the 10-minute turbulence intensity, as shown in Section 10, Table 1, is
applicable to the wind spectra recommended in IEC 61400-1. When the NPD (Frøya) wind spectrum is
used (see 4-2/3.5 of the ABS FOWT Guide), the adjustment factor of the 1-hour average wind speed
relative to 10-minute average wind speed still applies, but the turbulence intensity is a function of the 1-
hour wind speed and is embedded in the wind spectrum formulation. When the NPD (Frøya) wind
spectrum is used in 3-hour simulations, the mean wind speed and turbulence intensity may be taken the
same as those used in 1-hour simulations. For the tropical cyclone wind, the adjustment factor of the 1-
hour average wind speed relative to 10-minute average wind speed should be calculated based on the wind
gust factor given in A2/7 of the ABS FOWT Guide. For the tropical cyclone wind in a 3-hour simulation,
the mean wind speed and turbulence intensity may be taken the same as those used in 1-hour simulations.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 50
TURBINES • 2020
Section 10 Suggestions for Numerical Simulations 10
The wind generation should consider the 3D effects. Sensitivity analysis may be required to determine an
appropriate grid size of the 3D wind field.
TABLE 2
Adjustment of the Significant Wave Height
For 10-minute simulations, the wave height is not factored. In order to obtain the same level of extreme
value as a 3-hour simulation, 18 simulations (a total of 3 hours long) with different random seeds should be
performed and maximum wave height should be taken as the maximum of the 18 simulations. If the
constrained wave method is used, the number of random seeds may be reduced. The applicability of the
constrained wave method should be verified with 3-hour simulations. The advantage of using 10-minute
simulations is that wind conditions do not need the adjustment.
The number and range of discrete frequencies representing the hull transfer functions should be carefully
chosen to cover the peaks in the transfer functions and the area of significant wave excitations. It is also
important to identify how the employed computer program handles possible excitations outside the
frequency range of the hull transfer functions since this can be a source of error. Small frequency spacing
may be required to avoid repeating a time history within one simulation. Variable frequency spacing may
also be used, but the repetition period of a time history is more difficult to assess. The number, range, and
spacing of discrete frequencies should be determined and verified by sensitivity analyses.
The stability analysis normally is performed in the design of the RNA. This stability analysis should be
used to assist in determining the modes that are important to the load calculations in global performance
analyses.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 51
TURBINES • 2020
Section 10 Suggestions for Numerical Simulations 10
TABLE 3
Suggested Minimum DOFs for Modeling Flexibility of the RNA and the Tower
Components DOFs
An acceptable length of global performance simulation time duration depends on many factors, such as
natural periods of wave frequency and low frequency responses, contribution of wave frequency and low
frequency responses to the total response, degree of nonlinearity, system damping, etc. The simulation time
duration should be determined and verified by sensitivity check. Recent studies indicate that, for typical
floating oil and gas platforms in deep water, five to ten 3-hour simulations with different random seed
numbers (equivalent to a continuous 15 to 30 hours simulation) may be needed in order to obtain standard
deviations and extreme values of responses with good confidence.
For the design load cases (DLCs) and survival load cases (SLCs) defined in 5-2 of the FOWT Guide, time
histories of turbulent wind and irregular wave conditions should be long enough to ensure statistical
reliability of the estimate of the characteristic responses. In general, at least eighteen 10-minute stochastic
realizations (or a continuous 3-hour realization) should be generated for each turbulent wind condition and
sea state considered in the simulations. Additional guidance is given below:
● For the DLC 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 3.x, 4.x, 5.1 and 9.3, as defined in 5-2/3.5 TABLE
1 of the FOWT Guide, at least one set of eighteen 10-minute stochastic realizations should be
generated for each wind condition and sea state considered in the simulations. Three to six sets of
eighteen 10-minute simulations are recommended for the DLC 1.4, 1.5, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.5, 3.2, 3.3, 4.2,
4.3 and 5.1 when the RNA involves a transiet event. Fewer realizations may be used if it can be
demonstrated that the estimated extreme response is not less than that obtained using 3-hour
realizations or a total of 3 hours of realizations.
● For the DLC 1.6, 2.6, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 7.1, 9.1, 9.2, 10.x and the SLCs, as defined in 5-2/3.5 TABLE 1
and 5-2/5 TABLE 2 of the FOWT Guide, at least six 1-hour stochastic realizations should be generated
for each turbulent wind and sea state considered in the simulations. Six 3-hour simulations are
recommended for the DLC 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 7.1, 10.x and the SLCs when the RNA is in the parked
conditions. Realizations with a shorter simulation time duration may be assumed if it can be
demonstrated that the estimated extreme response is not less than that obtained using 1-hour or 3-hour
realizations.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 52
TURBINES • 2020
Section 10 Suggestions for Numerical Simulations 10
The values of mean wind speed, turbulence standard deviation and significant wave height referenced in
the DLCs and the SLCs requiring dynamic simulations should be appropriate to the chosen simulation time
duration. More specifically:
● For the DLC 1.6, 2.6, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 7.1, 9.1, 9.2, 10.x and the SLCs, as defined in 5-2/3.5 TABLE 1
and 5-2/5 TABLE 2 of the FOWT Guide, the values of mean wind speed, turbulence standard
deviation and significant wave height should be adjusted for different simulation time durations in
accordance with 10/7 and 10/9 of these Guidance Notes.
● For the load cases using 10-minute simulations, at least 18 simulations (a total of 3 hours) should in
general be performed. No adjustment is needed provided the wind conditions are based on a 10-minute
averaging time duration.
The suggested simulation time duration and number of random seeds for each DLC are summarized in
10/13 TABLE 4. The suggested values for the DLC 6.1 may also be applied to the SLCs. The extreme
statistical values for different load cases may be obtained as follows:
● For the DLC 1.4, 1.5, 2.3, 3.2, 3.3, 4.2 and 4.3 with the occurrence of events such as the extreme wind
gust, extreme wind shear, severe sea state, etc., the maximum value of a response should be
determined based on the transient value in each set of 18 10-minute simulations computed randomly in
the worst case. The occurrence of the event can be at any moment during the simulation. For multiple
sets of simulations, the maximum value of a response should be determined based on the average of
the maximum responses of each set of simulations.
● For the DLC 1.3 and 9.3 with the turbulent wind together with irregular sea states, among all
combinations of wind and wave conditions, the largest mean value of the maximum responses of
stochastic realizations should be taken.
● For the DLC 2.1, 2.2, 2.5 and 5.1 and with the turbulent wind together with irregular sea states and
with the occurrence of events such as a fault or a shutdown, the maximum value of a response should
be determined based on the mean value of the largest half of the maximum responses in each set of 18
10-minute simulations computed randomly in the worst case. The occurrence of the event can be at
any moment during the simulation. For multiple sets of simulations, the maximum value of a response
should be determined based on the average of the maximum responses of each set of simulations.
● For the DLC 1.6, 2.6, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 7.1, 9.1, 9.2 and 10.x as well as SLCs with the turbulent wind
together with irregular sea states, among all combinations of wind and wave conditions, the largest
mean value of maximum responses of stochastic realizations should be taken.
TABLE 4
Suggested Simulation Time Duration and Number of Random Seeds for the
DLCs (1 July 2020)
Turbine Condition DLC Type of Simulation Time Duration and Number of Random Seeds
Analysis*
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 53
TURBINES • 2020
Section 10 Suggestions for Numerical Simulations 10
Turbine Condition DLC Type of Simulation Time Duration and Number of Random Seeds
Analysis*
2) Power production plus 2.1 S Three sets of 18 × 10-minute simulation with different
occurrence of fault random seeds
6.4 F ---
8.4 F ---
10) Parked (standing still 10.1 S 1-hour or 3-hour simulation with 6 seeds
or idling)
10.2 S 1-hour or 3-hour simulation with 6 seeds
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 54
TURBINES • 2020
Section 10 Suggestions for Numerical Simulations 10
Note:
* For each DLC in the Table, the “Type of Analysis” is denoted “S” for the strength analysis or “F” for the fatigue analysis.
Most existing FOWT global performance analysis software is based on the time-domain aero-hydro-servo-
elastic coupled analysis approach. The simulation software is normally developed by combining aero-
elastic codes originally developed for land-based turbines with hydrodynamic codes and mooring dynamic
codes used for designing offshore oil and gas platforms. A typical aero-elastic code contains an
aerodynamic part, which is mostly based on Blade Element Momentum (BEM) Method, and a structural
part with various levels of complexity in modeling the drive train and elasticity of the blade and the tower.
Control system modeling is usually designed by users and linked to the aero-elastic codes through a
dynamic link library. Some simulation software models the mooring system quasi-statically rather than
dynamically.
TABLE 5
Suggested Analysis Methods for the DLCs (1 July 2020)
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 55
TURBINES • 2020
Section 10 Suggestions for Numerical Simulations 10
8) Temporary 8.1 S -
(installation,
8.2 S -
maintenance and
repair) 8.3 F -
8.4 F -
Note:
* For each DLC in the Table, the “Type of Analysis” is denoted “S” for the strength analysis or “F” for the fatigue analysis.
ABS GUIDANCE NOTES ON GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND 56
TURBINES • 2020